Colonel Bosco:
I'll address you point-by-point without quoting too much.
I said it's possible to own a portion of something without specifying
exactly which portion. I even gave specific examples (e.g. Microsoft,
water, network bandwidth) which nobody has yet refuted.
You say no, unless it
You are referencing Joint_Property (bad example)..
If your wife AND you have a $100 bill in your safe you BOTH have claim to
the asset -- you have claim to $50 and she to $50.. Now, you could change
the $100 bill for Two $50's and settle the matter --- OR you could cut
the bill in 1/2
From: Kenneth C. Griffith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The water bank owes you 1,000 liters. But you don't own the water
in the tank.
You do own the 1,000 liters. That is why the water bank owes it to you. If
you didn't own it, they wouldn't owe it to you. Why would they owe you
something you don't
You're missing the point. completely
You are comparing apples to oranges here with this ridiculous *water*
example.
You are comparing unallocated and unsegregated storage to allocated and
segregated storage!!!
Your water example is UNALLOCATED AND UNSEGREGATED water - you have
From: Colonel Bosco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On to other examples... Your shares of Microsoft,, guess what? Corporate
Shares have SERIAL NUMBERS.
My broker does not know that I own three specific shares #12038375,
#87289738, and #22703611. He only knows that I own three shares.
You may THINK
My broker does not know that I own three specific shares #12038375,
#87289738, and #22703611. He only knows that I own three shares.
Wrong. UNLESS you have the shares physically delivered to you, he knows
that YOU OWN a claim to three shares which are in the name of the brokerage
house.
